Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Auwrrlv 11.TrCXAe PRICE DANlEL ATTORNEYGENERAL July 6, 1950 Hon. J. C. McEvoy Opinion No. V-1082 County Attorney Waller County Re: The authority of the Hempstead, Texas Commissioners'Court to spend county funds for a private fair Dear Sir: Your request for an opinion is as follows: “In the year 1946, citizens of this Waller County associated themselves to- gether and formed a corporationand there- after a charter was duly issued to such corporationunder the laws of the State of Texas in the name of Waller County Fair Association;its capital stock is $259000. Since its Incorporation,the Waller County Fair Associationhas purchased some I.5 acres of land and has erected various ag-*a,fl~ _ rlcultural, horticulturaland lfvestock"CX-~',',*. ,,: hibit bufldlngs at a cost of about $35"0@; ' It has conducted annual fairs slnce"l$&;"' Although it is set up as a corpora$ion for blllty for the its entirety. Court does fairs contfnued,and to the FaS.rAssociationin nual exhibits of horticulturaland aip'i&l- tural products, livestock and mineral pPq- ducts, and such other products as aye of" Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 2 (V-1082) Interest to the community. The Commisslon- ers' Court is consideringentering Into a contract, on behalf of Wailer County, with the Fair Associationwhereby the Fair As- sociationwould provide the buildings, grounds and agricultural,horticultural and livestock exhibits, for which Waller County would pay,to the Fair Association the sum of $2,000.00 or $3,000.00;under such contract it is contemplatedthat the 'first gate' charge heretoforemade would be eliminated,and the people of Waller County would be entitled to be admitted, without charge, to all of the exhibits and all of the fair, save and except the rodeo, for which a separate charge would be made, as has been done heretofore. "The Commissioners'Court is desirous of being advised whether they may lawfully enter Into such a contract, and, If so, whether advertisementfor bids under Art. 2368a would be required." You further state In your brief that under the proposed contract the Waller County Fair Assocla- tlon "would provide for the 1950 exhibits of hortlcul- tural and agriculturalproducts, livestockand mineral products, and other products as are of Interest to the community,without an admission charge to the public." Article 2372d, V.C.S., provides In part.: 'Section 1. All counties in the State acting by and through their respectiveCom- missioners'Courts may provide for annual exhibits of horticulturaland agricultural products, livestock and mineral products, and such other products as are of Interest to the community. In connectiontherewith, such counties may also establishand maln- taln museums, Including the erection of the necessary buildings and other Improvements, In their own counties or in any other coun- ty or city In the United States, where fairs or expositionsare being held. . . Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 3 (V-1082) "Sec. 2. The Commlesfoners'Courts of the respective counties or the Commls- sloners'Courts of several counties may co- operate with each other and participatewith local Interests In providing for the erec- tion of such buildings and other lmprove- ments as may be necessary to accomplish the purpose mentioned In-Section1, of this Act and for the assembling,erecting, and maln- tainlng of such horticulturaland agricul- tural, livestock and mineral exhibits, and the expenses Incident thereto...." Article 2372d authorizescounties to construct buildings and other permanent Improvementsfor exhibits of horticultural,agricultural,livestock,and mineral products and to provide for such exhibits. Adams v. McGill, 146 S.W.2d 332 (Tex. Clv. App. 1941, error ref.). Itour opinion that counties are authorizedunder Article 2372d In providing such exhibits to contract with various individualsand associationsfor the as- sembling, erection, and maintenance of such annual ex- hibits as will best promote horticulture,agriculture, livestock raising, and the developmentof natural re- sources so long as such contract Is not In violation of the Texas Constitution. In this connection,It should be noted that It was held In Attorney General's Opinion No. O-2629, dated August 22, 1940, that Sections 51 and 52 of Article III of the Constitutionof Texas prohibit the Commlssloners~ Court from making a donation or contributionto any ln- -dlvidual or associationsuch as a "County Fair Associa- tion." sunder the facts submitted in your request, how- ever, Waller County does not propose to make a donation to the WaLler County Fair Association. On the contrary, the Commissioners1Court intends to contract for the use .ofthe buildings and ground8 owned by the Fair Associa- tion In holding the 1950 annual county fair and to employ the association to assemble, maintain, and operate such exhibits as will best carry out the purposes of Article 2372d. The Court in Bland v. City of Taylor, 37 S.W. 2d 291 (Tex. Clv. Ap -l931) affirmed In 123 Tex. 39, 67 S.W.2d 1033 (19347: In s&talning the validity of a tax levied for the purpose of "The establishmentand maintenance of a Board of City Development,Chamber of Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 4 (V-1082) Commerce, or other similar organizationunder whatsoever name, devoted to the growth, advertizement,development, Improvementand Increase of the taxable values of said city," held: "The provisionsof the Constitution which appellantsassert are violated are: Article 3, % 52; article 8, % 3; and arti- cle 11, % 3. By article 3, % 52, the Leg- islature la prohibited from granting to any city, etc., power to lend Its credit or grant money or thing of value to any ln- dlvidual, association,or corporationwhat- ever. Article l.1,PI3, prohibits any coun- ty, city, or municipalityfrom making any appropriationor donation or in any wise loaning Its credit to any private corpora- tion or association. "These provisions clearly contemplate and prohibit, we think, benefits at public expense attempted In behalf of individuals, corporations,or associations,as such, act- ing independentlyand conductingsome enter- prise of their own, such as are usually con- ducted for profit and commercial in their nature. In the Instant case no aid was at- tempted to the chamber of commerce, acting as an Independentassociation. The city undertook to, and did, create said board of city developmentwith defined duties, not to aid any association,but as a part of its municipal functions. Obviously,we think, there was no violation of article 3, % 52, nor of article 11, % 3, of the Constitution. "If In fact said,city had authority under the Constitutionand laws of the state to do the things authorizedby its charter, it Is wholly Immaterialwhether such board of city developmentsupplanted a private as- sociation theretoforemaintained by private subscription." (Emphasisadded) We therefore agree wjth the conclusionreached by you In your able brief that the Commiselonero'Court of Wailer County has the authority under the provisions of Article 2372d to contract with the Waller County Fair Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 5 (v-1082; Associationfor the use of its buildings and exhibits ip holding the 1950 Waller County~Fairand to employ the assoclatlon to assemble, erect, and maintain ex- hibits for.the promotfon and developmentof horticul- ture, agriculture,livestock ~aisfng, and mineral pro- ducts In the State and County ir I!!*the discretionof the Court It determines that the purposes of Article 23726 can best be carHed.out by such a contract. Section 2 of Aptlcle 2368a, V.C,S., provides, In part, that: "No county, acting through its Com- missioners Court, and no cf,ty!n thl,sState shall hereafter make any contract callfng for or requfrfng the expendetureor payment of Two Thousand ($2,000.00)Dollars or more out of any fund OP funds of any city or county or subdivision of any county creat- ing or imposing an oblfgatfo:nor lfabilfty of any nature or character upon such county or any subdfvislonof such county, or upon such city, without first submittfng such proposed contract to competftfvebids...." Article 2372d specificallyprovides that the provisions of Artid? 2368a are not repea3~edby Its pro- visions. It Is our opfnfon that 811~cethe contemplated contract calls for an expznditme of $2,000,00 or more, the contract may only be awarded orecompetitivebids. SUMMARY ---.- Under the provfsfons of Article 2372d the CommzLssfoneraDCou& of Wailer County has the authority to contract with a fair assocPatfon for the use of the a,ssocfatfon's buildings and employ the aatiocfatfonto as- semble, erect, and mair&ain exhibits for the promotI.onand developmentof horticulture, agriculture,livestock raising, and mineral products in the State and County. Adams v. McGill, 146 S.W.2d 332 (Tex. Civ. App. 1941 error ref.); --__ Bland v. City of Ta lor S.W.?d 291 (Tex. CXv.I- App.-&irizd ' in 123 Tex. 39, 67 S.W.2d X0:33(1934). Since the contract calls fog an expenditureof Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 6 (V-1082) $2,000.00 0P more, it must be submltted to competitive bids. Art. 2368a, V.C.S. Yours very truly, PRICE DANIEL APPROVED: Attorney General J. C. Davis, Jr. County Affairs Division Joe R Greenhill John Reeves First Assistant Assistant JR:mw:db